‘Strongly Recommended’ Revisiting Decisional Privacy to Judge Hypernudging in Self-Tracking Technologies
Introduction
New Tech and Mass Manipulation
Concerns regarding potential mass manipulation arise as new technologies use our data to predict and monetize on our behaviors. There are quite a few examples.
“Uber redesigns app to predict where riders are headed and give them more to do in the car”
Facebook and Cambridge Analytica (Trailer)
Key Concepts:
Hypernudging: “drawing in Big Data to nudge individuals with personalized feedback to change their behavior” (Lanzing 2019)
Self-tracking: “Fuelled by real-time data, algorithms create personalized online choice architectures that aim to nudge individual users to effectively change their behavior.” (Lanzing 2019)
Research Paper Outline
Main goal: An ethical critique of self-tracking technologies and their data-collection-based algorithmic hypernudging.
Theoretical Framework: decisional privacy and informational privacy as complementary dimensions
Claim: self-tracking technologies and their hyper-nudging threatens individuals’ autonomy due to the fact that they violate both decisional and informational privacy.
Four Steps:
Nudging v.s. Hypernudging (1.1 - 1.4)
Re-evaluation of decisional privacy (1.5 -1.6)
Combination of informational privacy and decisional privacy (1.7 - 1.9)
Three potential objections (1.10)
Main Body
Nudging and Hypernudging
So, nudging is when websites try to gently push you towards certain choices. Hypernudging? That’s like nudging on steroids! We’ll talk about how these techniques affect your privacy.
Decisional and Informational Privacy
Decisional privacy is about your freedom to make choices. Informational privacy is about who gets to know what about you. We’ll explore the differences and how they relate to the paper.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this paper shows us how important it is to be aware of privacy issues in the digital world. Let’s all be more mindful of our online choices! Thanks for checking out my awesome website!
